Council houses owning brand new cars?

[TheCluelessMum]

I’m writing this post with the hopes of being educated, not slandered

however I completely appreciate I may be just completely shot down for asking this.

i live on a new build estate, 12 houses at the start of the estate are council houses. I don’t know this because I’m a snob, I know this because it’s clearly marked on plans when you buy those houses.

i see so much stuff online about how the UK benefits system is failing people, the higher rise of food banks. It’s absolutely abhorrent people are in this situation.

however, when entering my estate today I noticed that each and every single council house had a car newer that a 20 plate. Mercedes, Audi’s, BMW’s even range rovers.. there was not a single house out of the 12 which had an older than 20 plate car.

I am now confused as to why this is the case? Everyone I know (including those receiving benefits) continually speaks about how hard the cost of living is.

so could someone please answer how/why those in what we would presume lower income families, are able to afford such lavish cars.

You "thought" instead of taking the trouble to find out doesnt fly in the digital age, when all it would have taken was to take your finger out from where you normally keep it and press a few buttons!

Are you sure they're even council houses?

Lots of new build estates have what is known as DOMV (discounted open market value) homes for sale which is a scheme ran by the local council (and if often required for the builder to provide before being granted permission to build) that there is a certain percentage of the homes built to be sold at a discounted rate (either 20% or 30% below open market value) to people who meet the criteria for the scheme.

It's a scheme ran by the council, but the homes aren't council houses. I know-because I got my home through that scheme and it's mine-not the council's.

I'm not saying this is necessarily relevant-it's just I see a ton of people on here (in previous threads on the subject) mixing it up with council housing-when the houses are mortgaged and owned by the people living in them-the same as all the other homes.

This might not be the case here- but I do wonder if it is. Also, not everyone who lives in council houses are on benefits.

I agree but I can see already the comments of ‘ooh but then there’s no incentive to increase your income’.
One could argue, why bother trying to get a mortgage if you can live cheaply in a council house? Obviously if people did this the system would collapse!
Can those posters in favour of lifetime tenancies really not understand how galling it is for those of us struggling to pay private rent or high mortgage rates (due to interest rate increases) to see some people in council properties with new cars etc when we’re struggling to make ends meet? The people I feel most sorry for are those who don’t qualify for social housing or are stuck for years on a waiting list struggling in private rentals.

Again it was your choice to get a mortgage.

And like i said earlier these attitudes show that there is no need for HAs to fit charging points for electric cars so they will be relieved.

BRING ON THE BLACK SMOKING POLLUTING GAS GUZZLERS

And that is the fault of the SH tenents?

Im going to share this thread EVERY time some eco warrior starts on about charging points for electric cars. This thread is a real gift Cheers @TheCluelessMum

I agree it was my choice to get a mortgage. That’s exactly my point! What if no one made the choice to strive to get a mortgage? Then there’d be an even bigger shortage of council properties. My point was: what’s the incentive? Why should I scrimp and save to pay a mortgage and build savings when I could just spend all my money and then get a council house?
It’s the same argument being used to justify lifetime tenancies ie if council residents are means tested it’s disincentive to earn more.

Where are you getting the idea from that people are spending all their money to get a council house. The Daily Mail or GB News
Im childfree by choice. So i dont get the benefits that parents get. Yet i have to put up with parents parking in our car park thats IN not NEAR as some other gaslighting MNer repeated back to me on another thread! Its the HAs private car park yet they are always parking in it and residents cant get or struggle to get out. After seeing the attitudes on this thread i now wonder if they are doing it on purpose. So parents are doing something DIRECTLY that affects me Can you give me an example of how SH tenants are DIRECTLY affecting you?

DH is 75 and disabled. We do really need a bungalow But im not sitting here moaning that other tenants are taking up bungalows. Because its not their bloody fault That would be ridiculous

Lots of people don't want to live in council properties. It varies around the country but in some towns the council housing is old fashioned, cramped, and not very desirable.

If some people with money want to live there, that's up to them. They probably value the family connections and sense of community.

Why should I scrimp and save to pay a mortgage and build savings when I could just spend all my money and then get a council house?
A mortgage is an investment that offers opportunities that will never be available to social housing tenants,
You can retire abroad using your home to finance a villa, as a rental or buying.

yeah some of these posters would be the first to moan if their taxes went up to pay for social care because family members cant care for elderly relatives because they have had to move too far away OR had to move because of the short term tenancies they are so in favour of

You also get to keep ALL your income once the mortgage has been paid off. And there’s the small fact that property increases in value. Apparently ours is “worth” about four times what we paid for it 26 years ago.

Not everyone living in a council house is on benefits. Which has already been said several times. Also, that a new car on finance is easier to get than a second hand one - not sure this is entirely true, I have bought second hand cars on finance in the past, but it maybe the case now. Also, people on PIP (like my SiL who suffers from the results of an aneurism and my DNs who are both wheelchair bound and one tube-fed - and none of them live in council houses btw) need it - it's very difficult to get.

If council houses are cramped they must be post Parker Morris standards. Houses built after the repeal of these basic standards are much smaller, whether social housing or private housing. Thank Mrs Thatcher for cramped houses.

So….give up your home and apply for social housing. Simple.👍

I t is disgusting how many "be kind" mums on here would be happy to see children being evicted from their homes because their parents have been promoted and earn a few pounds more than a figure the council have plucked out of the air after being bombarded by the "be kind" mob.

I understand it's galling if someone is living of the state and appears to have a higher standard of living, but why should someone who has paid full rent for their entire working life give up their home because someone else has a perceived greater 'need'.

There still seems to be a lack of understanding about council/social housing. I really don't understand why so many MNers think it would be fine to evict one family from their home to replace them with another. Who does this benefit?

Yes that's totally how it works. I shall just hand my keys back to the bank and stroll along to the council offices for my new keys... great idea.

Jealousy is no basis for a housing policy.

You've fundamentally misunderstood that you don't just get a council house for being poor. That's not how it works.

@Macaroni46 you also are not obliged to feel sorry for people living in council houses. Why would you? And how do you know that if that same tenant gave up their home for the applicant on the waiting list, they don't simply become the PRS tenant struggling on the list themselves?

It's kinda how it works. I had to be under a certain income to get on the list.

No it's not. Local authorities have to give reasonable preference to certain groups based on different kinds of housing need. Some local authorities have criteria about income or savings or assets to show that an applicant doesn't already have a property or couldn't reasonably be expected to buy one. They're not required to do that by law and some don't. That's not the case for all of them and there may also be exemptions to those kinds of tests for people with certain housing needs.
Social housing isn't just for the poorest people. It's for people who are less likely to be able to meet their own housing needs in the private sector for a range of reasons.

@ArminTamzerian I can give examples - people who are disabled or have a long-term health condition which is being negatively affected by their accomodation may be prioritised for social housing. People who are overcrowded. People whose accomodation is hazardous. People who have mobility needs that can't be accommodated in the private rented sector (this is a big one as disabled people often find the private sector inaccessible). Also people fleeing domestic violence and abuse, or harassment. People who need to live in a certain area to access specialist medical treatment.